Not allowed voluntary redundancy due to being on sick leave

BIAGD

Friend redeployed (under dubious circumstances) after 30+ years excellent service. He was subject to DDA for physical problems for 10 years. He didnt have a problem with being redeployed. Protracted redeployment led to mental health issues and after 6 months led to sick leave for severe depression. Company then said no jobs suitable for his physical restrictions and now mental health; but refused to allow him voluntary redundancy even though he said he would sign anything to get out for his health. They refused because he was on sick leave and eventually after dragging on for another year, terminated his contract due to capabilities.

Why, if no job available to suit restrictions Before and after he suffered mental health problems (4 months after redeployment) would they not allow VOLUNTARY redundancy and made him suffer further year of debilitating mental health problems?

Jarndyce

Because they didn't have to. They could get rid of him fairly on capability grounds and not have to pay out a redundancy payment. I agree many larger employers would have probably let him take VR or let him go on a compromise agreement with a small payment, but they didn't have to. Harsh, but lawful.

Judith_W

Because they have saved themselves 30 years worth of redundancy - sharks

BIAGD

Googlewhacker I refuse to be drawn into a heated argument with the reasons as to why no 'just resign' comment, suffice to say with a family and the usual millstones around normal working peoples necks - merely walking away is a luxury most cannot afford - UNFORTUNATELY - and naturally your health will suffer even more so.

Jarndyce and Judith thank you for your replies which have not helped answer the situation as I felt the same and just thought that maybe there was some motive I could not see. And strangely enough this is a BIG BIG company.

Torry_Quine

The thing is is that redundacy means that the job is no longer needed not that any individual is unable to do their job, in this case harsh as it may seem terminating him on grounds of competency was the only way they could legally proceed. If they had made him redundant they could not have employed someone else to do the job.

Jarndyce

Googlewhacker wrote: »

As a side point if he can prove that the mental health was brought on by negligence from the employer could he look at making a claim against the company (However I suspect this is very unlikely and hard)

Yes - always worth getting a free consultation with a personal injury solicitor to see if there is a potential case there - but don't build your hopes up.